Linda A. Buie v. Office of Personnel Management

386 F.3d 1127, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 21158, 2004 WL 2282496
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
DecidedOctober 12, 2004
Docket04-3071
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 386 F.3d 1127 (Linda A. Buie v. Office of Personnel Management) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Linda A. Buie v. Office of Personnel Management, 386 F.3d 1127, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 21158, 2004 WL 2282496 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Opinion

LINN, Circuit Judge.

Linda A. Buie (“Buie”) appeals from a final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board (“Board”), affirming the decision of the Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) calculating the amount of Buie’s deposit contributions to be made under the provisions of the Civil Service Retirement System (“CSRS”). Buie v. Office of Pers. Mgmt., 94 M.S.P.R. 595 (2003) (No. DA-0831-02-0096-1-1). Because Buie’s service was not “covered service” as defined by section 203(a)(3) of the Federal Employees’ Retirement Contribution Temporary Adjustment Act of 1983 (“FERC-TAA”) and she is thus not eligible to claim the reduced deposit rate contained in 5 U.S.C. § 8334(e), we affirm.

BACKGROUND

Buie was employed by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) from January 20, 1969 to September 14, 1984. Buie, 94 M.S.P.R. at 596. She later applied for, and received, a refund of her retirement contributions of $13,411.96 for that period of her service. Id. Buie was reemployed by the IRS from January 24, 1994 to July 19, 1994. Id. From August 6, 1994 to December 24, 1994, Buie worked as a Rural Carrier Relief for the U.S. Postal Service (“USPS”). Id. From December 24, 1994 to July 17, 1999, Buie worked for the USPS as a Rural Carrier Associate. Id. Buie’s service from January 24, 1994 to July 17, 1999 was considered non-contributory service, and CSRS deductions were not taken from her pay. Id.

Buie later applied to OPM to redeposit her retirement contributions for her periods of service between 1969 and 1984, and for a further deposit for her non-deduction periods of service between 1994 and 1999. Id. OPM sent Buie a bill for redeposit of contributions for $46,341.00 ($13,411.00 redeposit plus $32,930.00 interest), and deposit of contributions in the amount of $8,498.00 ($6,560.00 deposit and $1,938.00 interest). Id. Buie disagreed, but OPM determined that its calculations were correct. Id. at 596-97.

Buie appealed OPM’s decision. In an initial decision, the Board found that OPM correctly calculated the amount of redeposit and interest for Buie’s service between 1969 and 1984. Id. at 597. However, the administrative judge found that OPM had improperly calculated the amount of deposit and interest for Buie’s service between 1994 and 1999, holding that OPM had improperly relied on the basic pay rate in 5 U.S.C. § 8334(c) instead of the rate in 5 U.S.C. § 8334(k). Id.

OPM filed a petition for review of the Board’s initial decision. Id. In a final decision, the Board reversed the initial decision’s holding regarding the deposit for Buie’s 1994 to 1999 service, holding that Buie did not fall within the reduced deposit exception of 5 U.S.C. § 8334(c). Id. at 602.

Buie appealed the Board’s deposit determination to this court. We have jurisdiction from an appeal of a final decision of the Board pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(9).

ANALYSIS

A. Standard of Review

“Our scope of review in an appeal from a decision of the Board is limited. *1129 Specifically, we must affirm the Board’s decision unless we find it to be arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; obtained without procedures required by law, rule, or regulation having been followed; or unsupported by substantial evidence.” Abell v. Dep’t of the Navy, 343 F.3d 1378, 1382-83 (Fed.Cir.2003); 5 U.S.C. § 7703(c) (2000).

“The petitioner bears the burden of establishing error in the Board’s decision.” Harris v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 142 F.3d 1463, 1467 (Fed.Cir.1998).

B. The Parties’ Arguments

The parties dispute what basic pay rate under 5 U.S.C. § 8334(c) applies to Buie’s deposit for her service between 1994 and 1999. Buie argues that she should not be subject to the deposit rate set forth in section 8334(c) for her non-deduction service because her service was “covered service” under the FERCTAA exception in section 8334(c). According to Buie, to hold otherwise would render section 8334(c)’s exceptions a nullity.

The Government, representing OPM, responds that Buie’s service was not “covered service” as defined by section 203(a)(3) of FERCTAA. The Government argues that under the plain language of section 203, the Board correctly concluded that “covered service” included only federal employees that were made subject to Social Security coverage for the first time by section 101 of the Social Security Amendments of 1983, Pub. L. No. 98-21, 97 Stat. 65, 67-68 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 410). The Government argues that under Taxera v. Office of Personnel Management, 95 M.S.P.R. 97 (2003) (“Taxera II”), these employees include members of Congress, congressional employees, the President and Vice-President, officers serving under the Executive Schedule at 5 U.S.C. §§ 5312-5317, non-career Senior Executive Service or Senior Foreign Service employees, Article I and Article III judges, and all other federal employees not subject to CSRS because they were subject to a different federal employee retirement system. The Government contends that the specific language in section 203(a)(3) referring to employees who were subject to Social Security “by reason of’ amendments enacted by Pub. L. No. 98-21 excludes federal employees that were not covered by CSRS, but were covered by Social Security under provisions in effect prior to the enactment of Pub. L. No. 98-21. The Government argues that the legislative history is consistent with this interpretation.

C. The Statute

Section 8334(c) provides:

Each employee or Member credited with civilian service after July 31, 1920, for which retirement deductions or deposits have not been made, may deposit with interest an amount equal to the following percentages of his basic pay received for that service ....

5 U.S.C. § 8334

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Michael Keegan v. Social Security Administration
Merit Systems Protection Board, 2024
Azza Meshal v. Office of Personnel Management
Merit Systems Protection Board, 2023

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
386 F.3d 1127, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 21158, 2004 WL 2282496, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/linda-a-buie-v-office-of-personnel-management-cafc-2004.